The individual who passed along this new enhancement notes that for those looking for such things what appears to be a sagittal crest is more visible here:

Here’s another enhancement that seals the analysis. I herewith call this the “Backpack Bigfoot” case, due to the fact it looks like a human with a backpack following the caribou herd. Was he or she a camera person or merely a producer who had lost his/her way?

About Loren ColemanLoren Coleman is one of the world’s leading cryptozoologists, some say “the” leading living cryptozoologist. Certainly, he is acknowledged as the current living American researcher and writer who has most popularized cryptozoology in the late 20th and early 21st centuries.
Starting his fieldwork and investigations in 1960, after traveling and trekking extensively in pursuit of cryptozoological mysteries, Coleman began writing to share his experiences in 1969. An honorary member of Ivan T. Sanderson’s Society for the Investigation of the Unexplained in the 1970s, Coleman has been bestowed with similar honorary memberships of the North Idaho College Cryptozoology Club in 1983, and in subsequent years, that of the British Columbia Scientific Cryptozoology Club, CryptoSafari International, and other international organizations. He was also a Life Member and Benefactor of the International Society of Cryptozoology (now-defunct).
Loren Coleman’s daily blog, as a member of the Cryptomundo Team, served as an ongoing avenue of communication for the ever-growing body of cryptozoo news from 2005 through 2013. He returned as an infrequent contributor beginning Halloween week of 2015.
Coleman is the founder in 2003, and current director of the International Cryptozoology Museum in Portland, Maine.

46 Responses to “New IMAX Enhancements of “Backpack Bigfoot””

This clip is more convincing enhanced than it was when first posted. That’s rare.

The subject does not move like a bear. It looks more like a primate in many ways.

If it is a ninja suited crew member, he carries no camera in a filming position or sound boom with him. He would no doubt be the worst crew member ever.

The size of the hominid in the picture looks to be rather on the large side when compared to the caribou.

This footage, the director and original camera man deserves some attention. Effort needs to be made to explain the image. This is some good looking footage. It’s almost what I would expect to see if it were an actual sasquatch.

2) for sure: if it’s trying to do what the initial film company response to the BFRO said the crew member would be doing – influencing the herd – that sure doesn’t look like a way to do that. It looks even more in this sequence like the animal is stalking the herd, taking pains to stay OUT of sight, not in it. (Most of the herd can’t see it. We’re getting a better angle than they are.)

3) I thought the animal might be moving on all fours. This makes it appear that maybe it’s not. For certain, a bear cannot execute the movement seen here on two legs. But now we know it’s not a bear.

The person’s movement still puzzles me. He doesn’t look like he’s doing the film company’s work there. But that ain’t the story.

Feel bad? I should hope not! This is what crypto needs to start doing, big time, in 2010: following up and doing analysis. In fact, I tend to make bold statements precisely to prod that process. Maybe they’re listening. 😀 Even if not, this shows me that one of the key organizations in this field is up to doing its homework. That’s encouraging.

The more I watch it,it looks like a crew member possibly on a mountain bike.That could explain the fluidity of the movement.His body positioning looks like he is hunched over the handlebars while pedaling and then coasting down the slope,appearing to duck down.He could also be wearing a black cycling outfit including a black helmet and mask,as not to stand out.

This just confirms for me my opinion from then that there was no way it was a bear because even in the first version you could tell something was standing up rather quickly on two legs, moving fast and squatting back down. This new version just makes that easier to see. I did think though that after watching the first version the subject was facing toward the camera, looking at the caribou in the foreground crossing the river. Now, it is quite clear that it is actually watching the smaller group of caribou that are running away from it across the turf in the other direction. You can see the sheen off its back much like the sheen off the creature in the Patterson footage. This has an excellent chance of being a bigfoot, because if it was a cameraman, he or she would certainly know where the rest of the group was filming from, and would not risk getting in the picture. This is good stuff.

When DWA had said in the previous thread that it would be hard to notice this image during the action, I thought that was true, but I happened to see it upon first viewing precisely because I noticed and was interested in the second group of caribou running away in the distance.

In fact you can even tell that the subject is moving away from the camera slightly. It has moved diagonally toward the caribou in the distance, and in a big hurry, that I think could not be accomplished so quickly and smoothly by a human.

“The more I watch it,it looks like a crew member possibly on a mountain bike.That could explain the fluidity of the movement.His body positioning looks like he is hunched over the handlebars while pedaling and then coasting down the slope,appearing to duck down.He could also be wearing a black cycling outfit including a black helmet and mask,as not to stand out.”

Bigpooch, I can see where you are coming from, and what you have interpreted as a possibility, but your analysis makes no sense when you consider the circumstances. Do you honestly believe for a second that there is a biker up in the Great North, by himself, biking in depressions in the landscape with no trail, in the middle of caribou herds? That’s ludicrous. Also, if you watch closely at the end of the clip, the figure quite obviously quickly drops down, but then stays there for a moment before being out of view. A person on a bike could not do that as they would continue downhill. We have to eliminate I think a bear, a person on a bike, and anything other than a person or a bigfoot. And unless it is someone on the film crew making an egregious mistake in positioning, or someone native hunting in some way, I don’t think its reasonable to say it is a random person out there.

The real bigfoot appear to be mostly hunkered down on the hill well behind the backpacker. One dark subject appears to be standing upright, with 4 or 5 heads sticking up out of the grass around him. There appears to be movement with the upright subject, and some of the heads pop up, all while the camera is stationary so as not to create artificial movement.

After watching the blu-ray version, it appears to me like a sound man carrying a parabolic microphone (which you can only see about a quarter of) moving away from the camera. I think what some people see as a backpack is the upper left part of the microphone with the person’s body obscuring the rest of it as they crouch down. Although they filmed this from far away, they would need someone closer to the animals to obtain the sound.

I originally said in my comment of the first news report that i thought the movement was gorilla like moving sideways and squatting back down, though this enhanced footage has confirmed it I now am leaning more towards a human; who can equally achieve similar movements.

My problem is I do not believe it is a crew member, more I believe it is a innocent observer of the herd that didn’t know there was filming going on in the area and had slipped past the film crews attention. But i can’t understand why their all in black, unless they are head to toe in dark green camouflage clothing that appears black.

If this is Bigfoot it has quite a hunched back? I thought maybe carrying a baby but no mother would that whilst hunting?

I agree with bigpooch, it looks like a man on a bike with a backpack on, the “crest” is a bike helmet. The bike makes sense if you have crew members trying to keep up with a herd of caribou, or trying to sort of steer the heard to get the best camera shots. It looks like the biker may slow down and fall to the side (toward the camera filming him) onto the hill to stay out of site or to stop quickly. It’s impossible to tell how deep or wide the valley he is in is. It’s easy to assume it’s very small and would require effort to hide in, but maybe it’s deeper than we percieve from the one angle we have.

Go back and watch the second video here from about 1:00 to 1:05 and it, in my eyes, shows a biker with a helmet and backpack on.

What some might call a “sagittal crest” on the head of a Sasquatch, others might call a “hat” on the head of a film crew member. 🙂 Count me in the latter group.

While I agree it is not a bear, the movement of the subject; rising to a semi-crouched state, taking a few steps and then ducking back down, is certainly not outside a human’s range of motion. Remember, not everyone is slow and clumsy, especially guides, drivers and field personnel employed specifically to help capture images of wild animals in their native habitat!

An interesting piece of film to be sure! But PROOF that Bigfoot exists? Not so much…

It has moved diagonally toward the caribou in the distance, and in a big hurry, that I think could not be accomplished so quickly and smoothly by a human.joe levit

There’s nothing in that footage that shows the figure to be moving any faster than a human would be capable of. We’re really reaching here, even after the evidence shows the object in the film to be mundane.

Given the resolution of the earlier film this was definitely worth checking into, and it’s amazing just how much detail was brought out. Makes me appreciate the Patterson film even more, that thing’s been analyzed to death and never disproven.

“In another research, led by Lia Amaral from the University of Sao Paulo in Brazil, the carrying patterns in all nonhuman primates was studied and it was demonstrated a relationship between infant weight, hair friction and body angle which ensures that ape infants were carried safely.

For safety, all nonhuman primates carry their young clinging to their fur from birth, and species survival depends on it. However, with the growth of the infant the carrying pattern also changes.

Newborns are carried clinging to their mothers stomach, often with additional support. Months later, infants are carried over the adult body usually on the mothers back, and this carrying pattern lasts for years in apes.

Didn’t the Memorial Day video also suggest a possible infant on the back?

Well,this definitely has me leaning toward human..say 80/20 but still there is a few things about the clip that make me think otherwise. However,if I had to bet,I would probably lay money on human. Does appear to have a bit of a crest but that could be a hoodie,however,if it is human it is a fairly athletic and coordinated person. Take care everyone.

I could go either way with this , however I tend to filter out the speculation from my brain and in doing so I need to go directly to the most logical solution and that’s a person , someone placed over there to keep th animals from running away from the camera,Bigpooch gave the most logical answer and may I say has excellent identification skills as far as the bike idea goes , the posture does match.It’s also a good choice for this situation because if you wanted to herd without leaving an exhaust trail this is how you would do it.Either that or it’s a teenage mutant ninja turtle.

It is definitely a man. He looks to have a black stocking cap on. He is doing exactly what I suspected yesterday and that is redirecting the animals for the filming. I think the reason he may not look very effective in this shot is because this is just one very short snippet of what I’m sure was hours and hours of filming for the project.

If it was the BBC Natural History Department this would be considered ruined footage. And they wouldn’t have someone purposefully disturb the herd as then it would not be natural history. So ho ever directed this didn’t care how he/she got the shots.

You know where your “herd guys” are. You watch those sequences, carefully; you edit those shots out. Or, if you intend to include them, you include up-close-and-personal shots of Men at Work. Maybe they go on the “behind the scenes” on the DVD. But you make mention of them, if the inclusion is intentional.

It’s as amazing to me as a bigfoot, no, actually, much more so, that that got in. It not only would be easy to take out, but they wouldn’t have had that much footage to look at. And they knew JUST where to look.

I’m actually willing to go with some sort of primate. That is the feeling I got when I first saw. Very Gorilla-like. The big question would be, though—what is a Gorilla doing in THAT part of the world???

OTOH, it also does look like a person in a hoodie and backpack trying to duck out of the way. If so, why??? Guess it was some straggler not wishing to be filmed.
Overall, footage worth dissecting. Thanks for showing. 🙂

The main reason that “human” was a very low-order probability in my mind – other than the ape-like figure that we got from lower resolution – is the ethics of having a driver anywhere, let alone at a river crossing. The film shows a lot of animals staying in the river well past where most of the herd is crossing. This is very hard to understand except when seen from one angle: the animals you see in the water saw the “herd guy,” while they were still up on the other bank. The animals ahead of them – the ones you see actually heading toward and past the figure – didn’t see him, which is why he didn’t divert them. Keeping migrating animals in cold water longer than they need to be is pretty stressful, eh wot? I don’t think we get away with saying that caribou are great swimmers so no big. They’re not doing this for fun; swimming is harder than walking and running for them.

So it was not only the poor resolution that had me thinking not human. It was very questionable – and undocumented, but for what appears a big goof by the film crew – filming ethics. Call me naive; but I really thought that people doing stuff like this respected their subject more than that. There might be a very good reason that this tactic wasn’t documented. Thanks for the goof, there, guys!

Maybe something good will come of this, other than the potential for getting detail from IMAX blowups. Something should.

Maybe I’m getting a clearer resolution on my monitor, but I don’t understand why there is any controversy as to what is in the film. It’s as clear as day. A man in a hoody, with the hood tightly drawn around his head, gets up and is holding something elongated in his hand. He runs a ways and squats down.
I agree with Evo, he is probably recording sounds from close up, as the cameras wouldn’t pick up sounds from the distance they were. Remember, they use telescopic lenses, and could have been a quarter mile away.
A remote possibility is that the man is in a wet suit. It’s possible the herd was spotted moving to the river and the sound man crossed the river to be in position in that little draw.
For whatever reason he is there, it is definately a man, and nothing but a man.

Pawnee: it was the relatively poor resolution of early versions of the video, plus the belief of some of us that having a crew member herding the animals constituted bad filming ethics in which true pros wouldn’t engage (wrongo on that one) that led to speculation that this might not be human.

Some of the entries here date from the first version of this blog that didn’t have the Blu-Ray resolution. Ironically, the best resolution immediately prior to the Blu-Ray made it look the most apelike.

What I think is funny, is at the 0:24 mark on the second video. Whatever the blob is, is fixing to get ran over by one of the caribou. It is running directly to where the blob dropped down behind the knoll. That being said, I really like the 2nd video, it is really clear, and they did a good job with the frame-by-frame. I wish I had their tv and they had a feather up their bums, then we’d all be tickled, it must be a HDTV.

DWA, thanks for clarifying that. I came in a little late on this, and should have just observed the board more, before I commented. It makes sense now. I couldn’t identify what it was, from the first video, either.

Crest???? Thought ever occur to anyone that its a hood or wool skull cap(skully as the kids started calling them.)? Pull the cap up a bit like the strange brew guys or jay of jay and silent bob fame and presto instant crest! Just a thought.

Just my two cents worth here, but why does some guy who wants to be camouflaged wear all black? Considering that caribou see in black, white and grays, a better camo suit would be a heck of a lot lighter than what is being worn. And if that person wanted to be seen, they would not have leaped up from behind a hill, took a few steps and then hunker down. They would have leaped up at the right time and stood there waving their arms back and forth, causing the herd to change course.

The whole scene looks weird to me and not exactly right. The black color doesn’t fit, the backpack doesn’t fit, and a human in that position doesn’t fit either. And so it goes.

I also agree with all those above who thought it couldbe someone on a mountain bike. That was my first impression. I purposely watched the video without reading any pre or post commentary just so I can come to an immediate conclusion without any influence. That said, I’m already slightly influenced by just being on this site… LOL

I just wish when folks take shots of things that they get the real thing instead of making it up by using a large guy to do the job, wild life know the difference how-ever don’t forget folks the smell of the Bigfoot is really bad, to me the smell is like a horse stall or a cattle pen that hasn’t been cleaned out in weeks and its soaked up with old water and other things like old urine its gross..Parts of the film remine me of how one stalks something, wants to get close and yet it doesn’t and we don’t have any left over bones that show’s he or she eats game meat.